>> But unless there are actually cases of recent failures in the upgrade >> procedure (say from 4.6 up), then I would say that this is just legacy >> from ancient times which everybody follows "just to be sure"... > > Russ is correct, you are incorrect. Using the BDB tools to do upgrades of > the OpenLDAP DB has never been supported, and it is unlikely it ever will. > OTOH, OpenLDAP 2.5 will have a new backend that doesn't use BDB at all, so > long term this issue should go away. > > slapcat/slapadd are the only supported methods of upgrading OpenLDAP across > versions of BDB.
I don't really care that much to go to lenghty argument and you're with upstream. Anyway from quick Google search it seems that this recommendation is (mainly) for OpenLDAP upgrades (f.e. 2.3 -> 2.4)[1], which suddenly starts making sense (OpenLDAP database structures can change). (BTW: There's no information on Berkeley DB upgrades neither in the admin guide nor in the Faq-O-Matic.) I really don't know what could break if you are upgrading just the Berkeley DB library within the same OpenLDAP release when only the log structure changes. (Of course unless there is some bug in Berkeley DB itself.) But anyway that's your call and if you say it's not supported then it's not supported and I don't want to force my opinions to my fellow Debian DDs, who will be in the front line if something breaks. I was just saying that using slapcat/slapadd may be fail-safe, but unnecessary when OpenLDAP is linked to new version of Berkeley DB. 1. http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-software/200802/msg00289.html Ondrej -- Ondřej Surý <ond...@sury.org> http://blog.rfc1925.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
